DOCSLIB.ORG

From Grim to Green OECD Messages on Green Growth the Crisis Is No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Grim to Green OECD Messages on Green Growth the Crisis Is No From Grim to Green OECD Messages on Green Growth The crisis is no excuse to postpone environmental action The economic slowdown should not be used as an excuse to weaken long-term efforts to achieve low- carbon economic growth. Inaction on key environmental challenges, such as climate change, could lead to severe economic consequences in the future. ¾ Costs of Inaction on Key Environmental Challenges (OECD, 2008) highlights the economic and social costs of delaying action on climate change, air and water pollution, natural resource management, and natural disasters (www.oecd.org/env/costofinaction/publication), while the OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 (OECD, 2008) showed that well-designed policies to address the key environmental challenges are economically rational (www.oecd.org/environment/outlookto2030). “Green” investments can help The recession can open up new opportunities to both address the economic crisis and kick-start a move towards a low-carbon and “green” economy. For example, the stimulus packages being rolled out by many governments are opportunities for greening our economy. Many of them include direct public spending to support “green” investments in areas such as public transport, energy efficiency, alternative energy supply and “smart” electricity grids, water supply and sanitation systems, and pollution control. Tax incentives are also being given to firms and households that make green investments, for example in better insulation or energy efficient appliances. New investments being made today in energy production, buildings and transport infrastructure will be in place for decades. So it is important to ensure that economic stimulus packages do not lock-in polluting energy technologies or dirty production and consumption, but instead promote clean alternatives. To ensure this, the environmental impacts of other measures in the stimulus packages should be assessed, with particular attention paid to those such as car-scrapping programmes, investments in new roads, and reductions in electricity and fuel charges. Short-term efforts to revitalise the economy must not come at a long-term cost to the environment. ¾ The OECD Meeting of Council at Ministerial Level (24-25 June 2009) brought together Ministers of Economy and Finance from OECD countries and the major emerging economies. A major focus of discussions was on how best to foster a green recovery. (www.oecd.org/mcm2009) Countries should reform costly and environmentally damaging policies The crisis is also an opportune moment to re-assess and reform those policies that are both economically costly and environmentally damaging. A key element in policy reform for green growth is to remove environmentally harmful subsidies, especially for fossil fuel production (still prevalent in some OECD countries), consumption (especially in some emerging economies and developing countries) and for environmentally-harmful agricultural production. It would save money for governments and taxpayers, and shift the economy away from activities that pollute and over-use natural resources. ¾ A new OECD report on The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: How to Build the Necessary Global Action in a Cost-Effective Manner? finds, amongst other things, that removing fossil fuel subsidies in emerging and developing countries alone could reduce global GHG emissions by 10% by 2050, while also increasing the efficiency of these economies. The crisis is an opportunity to put in place cost-effective environmental policies The current economic crisis also provides an incentive to improve efficiency in the use of energy and materials and an opportunity to push through reforms that move us towards a greener world economy. Countries will now be even more aware of the costs of policy actions, so the OECD policy recommendations for least-cost approaches to climate change and other environmental challenges are increasingly more relevant. To contain costs, governments should use market-based instruments such as water pricing, greenhouse gas emissions trading with auctioned permits, taxes on pollutants, and waste charges. These measures have the added benefit − in a situation where public finances are over-extended − of bringing in revenues which could contribute to fiscal consolidation or be used to reduce other taxes that create economic distortions. A number of countries are using the crisis as an opportunity to push through green tax reforms, often using the revenues raised to reduce taxes on labour income. Some industries fear that green taxes and emissions trading would put them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors who may not be subject to similar costs. This was seen last year in discussions on free allocation of permits for the EU Climate and Energy Package, as well as more recently with the proposed Waxman-Markey Bill in the US. But OECD analysis has found that the effects of climate policies on competitiveness are often quite small, particularly if a sufficiently large group of countries take action. Price- and market-based policy instruments should be complemented by regulations and standards, R&D, eco-labelling, and education. Examples include encouraging more energy-efficient buildings through building codes and household electric appliance standards, and cutting trade barriers to climate-friendly goods such as low-energy light bulbs. Countries should also assess carefully the costs and environmental benefits of some of their environmental policies, for example some measures to support renewable energy. Recent OECD analyses show that support policies for biofuels production in the US, Canada and the EU can cost as much as 1000 US dollars per tonne of CO2 reduced – a very high cost for achieving emission reductions. ¾ OECD work on the economics of climate change is supporting countries to develop and implement cost- effective policies to address climate change. An OECD report Climate Change Mitigation: What do we do? was released in December 2008 in Poznan, supported by a series of technical working papers. (www.oecd.org/env/cc/econ) ¾ A new OECD report on The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: How to Build the Necessary Global Action in a Cost-Effective Manner? was released in June 2009. It will focus on identifying least-cost policy mixes, analysing the incentives for major emitting countries to participate in action, addressing carbon leakage and competitiveness impacts, and assessing financing possibilities. How can we foster clean technologies for a greener future? New green technologies can also help to cut the future cost of addressing environmental challenges such as climate change. But investors need policy certainty, and stable and predictable price signals to know that it is worth developing technologies for a green future. For a start, putting a price on carbon emissions and other pollutants will provide incentives and help create markets for the development and diffusion of green technologies such as solar and wind energy and carbon capture and storage. But specific R&D policies are also needed to complement pricing of pollution. Public and private financing for green innovation needs to be increased, as well as public-private collaboration on large-scale R&D projects. Some governments are supporting longer-term R&D in the area of green technology as part of their economic stimulus packages. But this is not a choice between better pricing or stimulation of technological innovation: getting the prices right will likely be one of the best triggers for such innovation. ¾ OECD is developing an Innovation Strategy to provide an in-depth understanding of how government policies can best support innovation to address key challenges, including environmental challenges. (www.oecd.org/innovation/strategy) ¾ A recent OECD report Environmental Policy, Technological Innovation and Patents provides empirical evidence of how government policies best incentivise environmentally friendly innovation in a number of areas, including renewable energy technologies. (www.oecd.org/environment/innovation) ¾ OECD Global Forum on Eco-Innovation (Paris, 4-5 November) will take stock of best practices in promoting green innovation. (www.oecd.org/environment/innovation/globalforum) .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Building a Sustainable and Desirable Economy-In-Society- In-Nature
    SCIENCE | ENVIRONMENT State of the World 2013 2013 STATE OF THE WORLD is Is Sustainability Still Possible? SUSTAINABILITY “State of the World 2013 assembles the wisdom and clarity of some of the earth’s finest thinkers, visionaries, and activists into a dazzling array of topics that merge to offer a compellingly lucid and accessible vision of where we are—and what is the wisest and healthiest course for the future.” OF THE WORLD STATE —NINA SIMONS, Cofounder, Bioneers Still Possible? “This edition forges a new path for the State of the World series, and for environmental thinking in general. A pivotal book that marks a defining moment for our species.” — RICHARD HEINBERG, Senior Fellow, Post Carbon Institute, and author of The End of Growth “State of the World 2013 is a powerful collection of articles, and the vision behind it is impressive. Here is a book that gets beyond ‘sustainababble’ and asks the tough, essential questions. It should make readers more determined than ever to do their part in avoiding planet-wide disaster—and better informed about how to do that.” — PETER SINGER, Professor of Bioethics, Princeton University, and author of Animal Liberation, One World, and The Life You Can Save Sustainability gets plenty of lip service, but the relentless worsening of key environmental trends reveals much of that attention to be “sustainababble.” From climate instability and species extinctions to approaching scarcities of freshwater, minerals, and energy, worrisome limits to human economic activity look more pressing each year—all while our political institutions seem impotent to address the challenge. THE WORLDWATCH INSTITUTE, in this edition of the celebrated State of the World series, takes an unflinching look at what the data say about the prospects for achieving true sustainability, 2013 what we should be doing now to make progress toward it, and how we might cope if we fail to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Greening Recovery Efforts for People, Planet and Prosperity
    Greening Recovery Efforts for People, Planet and Prosperity UN Development Group Task Team on the Socio-Economic Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic 9 April 2021 1. Why a Green Recovery? 2. A Future Possible - Country Examples 3. Navigating Forward - possible UN Responses 2 Overview of a ‘Once in a Generation’ Crisis 3 Source - World Bank Why a Green Recovery? • Spending on clean energy has an impact on GDP that is about 2x – 7x stronger—than spending on non-eco- friendly energy. (IMF, 2021) • Investing in nature conservation has multipliers of up to 7x over five years. Spending to support unsustainable land uses has negative returns. (IMF, 2021) • investments in renewable energies, building efficiency and green transport would add 20.5 million jobs by 2030, compared to 3 million jobs under BAU (ILO) • Green R&D spending has high growth and positive climate/nature/pollution multipliers. Source: Hepburn et al. 2020 4 Global Green Recovery Response to Date USD 14.6 trillion (excl. EC) USD 1.9 trillion USD 341 billion 5 Source - UNEP-Oxford Smith School, 2021 // *data for 2020 - does not cover spending announced in 2021 Global Green Recovery Response to Date … Green recovery spending as a percentage of total Total debt stock for 19 EMDE countries over time recovery spending, versus recovery spending as % GDP (AE spending 17x higher than EMDE spending) Source - UNEP-Oxford Smith School, 2021 // *data 6 for 2020 - does not cover spending announced in 2021 …and limited options for many with looming debt vulnerability Source: UNDP, April 2021. Sovereign 7 Debt Vulnerabilities in Developing Economies A Future Possible - Country Examples The Self Starters Some Green Recovery Examples GREEN ENERGY Argentina – USD 390K to finance the incorporation of renewable energy into the fishery industry Colombia – USD 4.3 million funding for 27 strategic renewable energy and transmissions projects, including the generation of 55 thousand jobs, include 9 wind, 5 solar, 3 geothermal and one hydrogenation, as well as 9 energy transmission lines.
    [Show full text]
  • A Green Economic Recovery: Global Trends and Lessons for the United States
    A Green Economic Recovery: Global Trends and Lessons for the United States Jonas Nahm Assistant Professor for Energy, Resources, and Environment School of Advanced International Studies Johns Hopkins University Statement before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, Energy, and the Environment Hearing on Green Recovery Plans for the COVID-19 Crisis The economic recession caused by efforts to contain the global Covid-19 pandemic has, in the short- term, led to a drop of global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet three factors caution against optimism that the economic recession could trigger substantial shifts toward long-term decarbonization. First, emissions reductions during the current economic recession have been small and are unlikely to have a lasting impact on efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Past recessions have been followed by rapid increases in emissions that have offset much of the downturn and the 2020 recession has begun to follow a similar pattern. Second, while economic stimulus spending in the recovery offers an opportunity to invest in long-term climate policies that also create jobs and deploy capital in the economy, G20 economies have thus far spent far less on programs with environmental co-benefits than in the aftermath of the 2009 recession. Third, the Covid-19 pandemic has further strained economic and political relationships with China, a key producer of technologies urgently needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the global economy. This is detrimental to short-term efforts to address the global climate crisis. The United States is uniquely equipped to be at the global frontier of clean energy technology innovation.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Economy Or Green Utopia? Rio+20 and the Reproductive Labor Class
    Green Economy or Green Utopia? Rio+20 and the Reproductive Labor Class Ariel Salleh University of Sydney [email protected] Sociologists use the concept of class variously to explain and predict people's relation to the means of production, their earnings, living conditions, social standing, capacities, and political identification. With the rise of capitalist globalization, many sociologists focus on the transnational ruling class and new economic predicaments faced by industrial workers in the world-system (see, for example, Robinson and Harris 2000). Here I will argue that to understand and respond to the current global environmental crisis, another major class formation should be acknowledged - one defined by its materially regenerative activities under "relations of reproduction" (Salleh 2010). The salience of this hypothetical third class is demonstrated by the 2012 United Nations Rio+20 summit and its official "green economy" negotiating text The Future We Want (UNCSD 2012). Clearly, the question that begs to be asked is - who is the "we" in this international document, and whose "utopia" does it serve? Part of the answer is found in a recent G20 media release, suggesting that "current high energy prices open policy space for economic incentives to renewables [...] investors are looking for alternatives given the low interest rates in developed countries, a factor that presents an opportunity for green economy projects” (Calderon 2012). The UN, together with the transnational capitalist class, looks to technology and new institutional architectures to push against the limits of living ecologies, and these measures are given legitimation as "economic necessity." Yet empirically, it is peasants, mothers, fishers and gatherers working with natural thermodynamic processes who meet everyday needs for the majority of people on earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Growth Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: the Alternative Solution for Achieving the Balance Between Both the Natural and the Economic System
    sustainability Editorial Green Growth Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: The Alternative Solution for Achieving the Balance between Both the Natural and the Economic System Diego A. Vazquez-Brust 1,2 and José A. Plaza-Úbeda 3,* 1 Portsmouth Faculty of Business and Law, Richmond Building, Portland Street, Portsmouth P01 3DE, UK; [email protected] 2 Production Engineering Department, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis 88040-900, SC, Brazil 3 Economics and Business Department, University of Almeria, 04120 Almeria, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] 1. Introduction “We are ethically obliged and incited to think beyond what are treated as the realistic limits of the possible” (Judith Butler, 2020) The existence of an imbalance between our planet’s reserves of resources and the conditions necessary to maintain high levels of economic growth is evident [1]. The limitation of natural resources pushes companies to consider the possibility of facing critical situations in the future that will make it extremely difficult to reconcile economic Citation: Vazquez-Brust, D.A.; and sustainable objectives [2]. Plaza-Úbeda, J.A. Green Growth In this context of dependence on an environment with finite resources, there are Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: growing interests in alternative economic models, such as the Circular Economy, oriented to The Alternative Solution for the maximum efficient use of resources [3–5]. However, the Circular Economy approach is Achieving the Balance between Both still very far from the reality of industries, and the depletion of natural resources continues the Natural and the Economic System. undeterred [6]. It is increasingly necessary to explore alternative approaches to address the Sustainability 2021, 13, 4610.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Stimulus Index an Assessment of the Orientation of COVID-19 Stimulus in Relation to Climate Change, Biodiversity and Other Environmental Impacts
    Green Stimulus Index An assessment of the orientation of COVID-19 stimulus in relation to climate change, biodiversity and other environmental impacts The Green Stimulus Index (GSI) assesses the effectiveness of the COVID-19 stimulus efforts in ensuring an economic recovery that takes advantage of sustainable growth opportunities, and is resilient to climate and biodiversity. It provides a method to gauge the current impact of the COVID-19 responses, to track countries’ progress over time, and to identify and recommend measures for improving the effectiveness of those responses. This assessment is updated regularly – please use the latest version. This note is part of a series looking at economic responses to COVID-19. Other notes relate to corporate bailouts, international assistance flows into developing countries and job-creating fiscal stimulus. This work was undertaken by the Finance for Biodiversity Initiative (F4B) and funded by the MAVA Foundation. Spokesperson is Mateo Salazar. Contact email: [email protected] Executive summary Across 17 major economies, announced economic stimulus packages will pump approximately USD 3.5 trillion directly into sectors that have a large and lasting impact on nature. These flows present an opportunity to support these sectors through the current COVID-19 crisis, while increasing their sustainability and resilience in the face of the parallel climate and biodiversity crises. So far, government responses have largely failed to harness this opportunity, disregarding the broader sustainability and resilience impacts of their actions. In 13 of the 17 countries considered, potentially damaging flows outweigh those supporting nature. Of the more developed countries, the United States stands out as the largest scale risk, with $479 billion USD providing unrestricted support to sectors proven to be environmentally harmful in the past amidst several rollbacks on environmental regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pathway to a Green New Deal: Synthesizing Transdisciplinary Literatures and Activist Frameworks to Achieve a Just Energy Transition
    The Pathway to a Green New Deal: Synthesizing Transdisciplinary Literatures and Activist Frameworks to Achieve a Just Energy Transition Shalanda H. Baker and Andrew Kinde The “Green New Deal” resolution introduced into Congress by Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Senator Ed Markey in February 2019 articulated a vision of a “just” transition away from fossil fuels. That vision involves reckoning with the injustices of the current, fossil-fuel based energy system while also creating a clean energy system that ensures that all people, especially the most vulnerable, have access to jobs, healthcare, and other life-sustaining supports. As debates over the resolution ensued, the question of how lawmakers might move from vision to implementation emerged. Energy justice is a discursive phenomenon that spans the social science and legal literatures, as well as a set of emerging activist frameworks and practices that comprise a larger movement for a just energy transition. These three discourses—social science, law, and practice—remain largely siloed and insular, without substantial cross-pollination or cross-fertilization. This disconnect threatens to scuttle the overall effort for an energy transition deeply rooted in notions of equity, fairness, and racial justice. This Article makes a novel intervention in the energy transition discourse. This Article attempts to harmonize the three discourses of energy justice to provide a coherent framework for social scientists, legal scholars, and practitioners engaged in the praxis of energy justice. We introduce a framework, rooted in the theoretical principles of the interdisciplinary field of energy justice and within a synthesized framework of praxis, to assist lawmakers with the implementation of Last updated December 12, 2020 Professor of Law, Public Policy and Urban Affairs, Northeastern University.
    [Show full text]
  • Youthxchange Green Skills and Lifestyles Guidebookpdf
    The United Nations Educational, Scientifi c, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) www.unesco.org The United Nations Educational, Scientifi c and United Nations Educational, Scienti c Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was founded on and Cultural Organization November 16, 1945. This specialized United Nations Tel: +33 (0) 1 45 68 10 00 United Nations agency’s mission is to contribute to the building Fax: +33 (0) 1 45 67 16 90 Educational, Scientific and United Nations Cultural Organization of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable [email protected] Educational, Scientific and development and intercultural dialogue through Cultural Organization education, the sciences, culture, communication and information. For more information: UNESCO Division for Inclusion, www.ilo.org Peace and Sustainable Development International Labour Organization 7, place de Fontenoy Tel: +41 (0) 22 799 6111 75732 Paris Cedex 07 France Fax: +41 (0) 22 798 8685 Tel: +33 (0) 1 456 810 36 [email protected] Fax: +33 (0) 1 456 856 44 Email: [email protected] www.unesco.org/education This publication is a contribution to: – The Global Action Programme (GAP) on Education for Sustainable Development, which seeks to generate and scale-up ESD as the follow up to the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. The GAP’s priority action area #4 focuses on empowering and mobilizing youth. For more information: http://en.unesco.org/gap youth change – The 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production’s Sustainable Lifestyles & Education Programme, X which aims to foster the uptake of sustainable ©Thad Mermer Green Skills and Lifestyles Guidebook lifestyles as the common norm, with the objective of ensuring their positive contribution to addressing global challenges.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change: Green Recovery and Trade
    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE CHANGE, GREEN RECOVERY AND TRADE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE CHANGE, GREEN RECOVERY AND TRADE Geneva, 2021 ii © 2021, United Nations This work is available through open access, by complying with the Creative Commons licence created for intergovernmental organizations, at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its officials or Member States. The designations employed and the presentation of material on any map in this work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Photocopies and reproductions of excerpts are allowed with proper credits. This publication has not been formally edited. United Nations publication issued by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. UNCTAD/DITC/TED/2021/2 eISBN: 978-92-1-005630-4 iii Contents Note ........................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................iv Acronyms and abbreviations ......................................................................................................................v
    [Show full text]
  • ARE THERE DOWNSIDES to a GREEN ECONOMY? the Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit
    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT ARE THERE DOWNSIDES TO A GREEN ECONOMY? The Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit New York and Geneva, 2013 ii ARE THERE DOWNSIDES TO A GREEN ECONOMY? Note Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Material in this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted, but acknowledgement is requested, together with a reference to the document number. A copy of the publication containing the quotation or reprint should be sent to the UNCTAD secretariat. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations. Acknowledgements This paper was prepared by Aaron Cosbey ([email protected]), Associate and Senior Climate Change and Trade Advisor of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) within the framework of the activities of the UNCTAD Climate Change Programme. The author would like to thank a number of reviewers for their valuable input on this text, including Lucas Assunção, Daniel De La Torre Ugarte, Eugenia Nunez, David Vivas-Eugui and Chris Beaton, as well as the participants of the UNCTAD/UNEP/DESA Ad Hoc Expert Meeting on The Green Economy: Trade and Sustainable Development Implications, Geneva, 7-8 October 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • The Potential Role of Carbon Labeling in a Green Economy
    Energy Economics 34 (2012) S53–S63 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Energy Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco The potential role of carbon labeling in a green economy Mark A. Cohen a,b,⁎, Michael P. Vandenbergh c a Vanderbilt University, United States b Resources for the Future, United States c Climate Change Research Network, Vanderbilt Law School, United States article info abstract Article history: Over the past several years, labeling schemes that focus on a wide range of environmental and social metrics Received 30 January 2012 have proliferated. Although little empirical evidence has been generated yet with respect to carbon footprint Received in revised form 22 May 2012 labels, much can be learned from our experience with similar product labels. We first review the theory and Accepted 30 August 2012 evidence on the role of product labeling in affecting consumer and firm behavior. Next, we consider the role Available online 7 September 2012 of governments and nongovernmental organizations, concluding that international, multistakeholder organi- zations have a critical part to play in setting protocols and standards. We argue that it is important to consider JEL classification: D82 the entire life cycle of a product being labeled and develop an international standard for measurement and F18 reporting. Finally, we examine the potential impact of carbon product labeling, discussing methodological K32 and trade challenges and proposing a framework for choosing products best suited for labeling. L15 © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. M31 Q54 Keywords: Carbon labels Voluntary disclosure Consumer behavior Life-cycle analysis Rebound effect Leakage 1. Introduction retailers to promote green products.
    [Show full text]
  • How Green Is India's Stimulus for Economic Recovery?
    1 Vibhuti Garg, IEEFA Energy Economist, Lead India Max Schmidt, IISD Fellow Christopher Beaton, IISD Lead, Sustainable Development March 2021 How Green Is India’s Stimulus for Economic Recovery? How India Can Raise Its Ambition for a Green Stimulus in 2021 Executive Summary As of the beginning of March 2021, no other economy has committed as much money to the energy sector as India has in response to the ongoing global COVID-19 crisis or to meet its long-standing ambitions on other policy objectives, such as energy security, air pollution and climate change.1 But where is the public money commitment going: towards sustainable energy choices? Or towards fuels or sectors with high carbon emissions? Analysis of 70 energy-related policies from the Energy Policy Tracker (EPT), as well as India’s annual budget announcements in February 2021 presents a “mixed bag” picture. More than US$120bn has been committed to the energy sector since January 2020, of which renewable-energy-related measures received almost twice as much funding as fossil fuels. However, both are dwarfed by policies related to other sectors. These policies largely support transmission and distribution companies in the power sector and may disproportionately benefit fossil fuels, depending upon whether the government promotes more fossil fuels than clean technologies under such programs. While the COVID-19 crisis has dominated energy sector discourse over the past year, we estimate that around ~22% of the committed value is primarily intended to deal with COVID-19, while the rest of the support reflects ongoing government policy objectives on energy security, climate change and air pollution.
    [Show full text]